Ann: Board update , page-3

Christique - I want to agree and I want to believe but I really think that there is so much uncertainty in the MacQGen assets that will hold this back.

I ask myself these questions:

1. What attracted me to ERM in the first place. It was the customer driven focus and the gas generation assets. It was not the gas exploration or the fringe assets. I dont own SKI or any of the traditional generators because I have a concern that there is pressure on governments re coal powered stations and there is pressure to change the way they get paid for producing electricity - politicians have a totally disillusioned public - costs have gone up too much and the gap between what the producer is paid and the wholesale price has become far too high.

2. Would I have invested if the assets were more about coal fired electricity generation than existing business - I am not sure I would have. maybe thats a naive response but whilst I understand its not logical to stop that generation - I dont like owning assets that the public see as bad and pricing is going up far too fast.

3. I understand the electricity trading risk but in a market where usage has dropped each year and the generation they thought they needed is not there than owning the base load asset is a weakness in my opinion. With the big car manufacturers leaving I am sure it will get worse before it gets better. I think I would be happy to have a price risk when supply exceeds need.

4. Nothing has changed but the growth prospects must change if we buy such a controlled asset.

I have increased my holding at these low prices but I see that as defensive rather than an investment strategy.

This has been a great investment but now it trades at my average price so really it isnt helping and has wiped out at least two years of grinding out a profit.